| Literature DB >> 33286537 |
Pengfei Wang1, Yanbin Gao1, Menghao Wu1, Fan Zhang1, Guangchun Li1, Chao Qin1.
Abstract
Fiber optic gyroscope (FOG) is one of the important components of Inertial Navigation Systems (INS). In order to improve the accuracy of the INS, it is necessary to suppress the random error of the FOG signal. In this paper, a variational mode decomposition (VMD) denoising method based on beetle swarm antenna search (BSAS) algorithm is proposed to reduce the noise in FOG signal. Firstly, the BSAS algorithm is introduced in detail. Then, the permutation entropy of the band-limited intrinsic mode functions (BLIMFs) is taken as the optimization index, and two key parameters of VMD algorithm, including decomposition mode number K and quadratic penalty factor α , are optimized by using the BSAS algorithm. Next, a new method based on Hausdorff distance (HD) between the probability density function (PDF) of all BLIMFs and that of the original signal is proposed in this paper to determine the relevant modes. Finally, the selected BLIMF components are reconstructed to get the denoised signal. In addition, the simulation results show that the proposed scheme is better than the existing schemes in terms of noise reduction performance. Two experiments further demonstrate the priority of the proposed scheme in the FOG noise reduction compared with other schemes.Entities:
Keywords: beetle swarm antenna search algorithm; fiber optic gyroscope; permutation entropy; signal denoising; variational mode decomposition
Year: 2020 PMID: 33286537 PMCID: PMC7517315 DOI: 10.3390/e22070765
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Entropy (Basel) ISSN: 1099-4300 Impact factor: 2.524
Figure 1Flowchart of the proposed method.
Figure 2Bumps original signal.
Figure 3Impulse signal.
Figure 4Simulation signal.
Figure 5Convergence curve of the beetle swarm antenna search (BSAS) algorithm.
Figure 6Decomposition result of the simulation signal.
Figure 7Determination of demarcation point.
Figure 8Denoised results.
Noise reduction performance index of four methods.
| Method | Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR/dB) | Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) |
|---|---|---|
| Proposed method | 18.3232 | 0.2183 |
| Traditional VMD | 17.2877 | 0.2459 |
| Traditional EMD | 15.2305 | 0.3116 |
| Wavelet transform | 17.3686 | 0.2436 |
Figure 9Experimental equipment. (a) FOG-based IMU. (b) Three-axis turntable.
Parameters of the FOG.
| Parameter Item | Parameter Values |
|---|---|
| FOG dynamic range ( |
|
| FOG bias stability ( | 0.03 |
| FOG random bias ( | 0.003 |
Figure 10Fiber optic gyroscope (FOG) static test raw signal.
Figure 11Denoising results of four different methods for static test experiment.
Noise intensity (NI) and root mean square error (RMSE) comparison for the four methods.
| Method | Noise Intensity (NI) | Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) |
|---|---|---|
| Proposed method | 7.3872 | 1.2939 |
| Traditional VMD | 1.9982 | 2.2630 |
| Traditional EMD | 2.6109 | 2.8105 |
| Wavelet transform | 1.2901 | 1.6716 |
Figure 12Denoising results of four different methods at a rotational speed of 5 /s.
Figure 13Denoising results of four different methods at a rotational speed of 10 /s.
Denoising results of four methods at different rotation speed.
| Rotational Speed | Proposed Method | Traditional VMD | Traditional EMD | Wavelet Transform | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NI | RMSE | NI | RMSE | NI | RMSE | NI | RMSE | |
| 5 ( | 1.2759 | 1.4448 | 3.2013 | 3.2723 | 4.8796 | 4.9211 | 2.3837 | 2.4785 |
| 10 ( | 1.3437 | 1.8412 | 3.2248 | 3.4618 | 4.9692 | 5.1202 | 2.3852 | 2.6971 |